Patent - Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS

[Canon Rumors]

Share

You want IS?
A patent for an EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS has surfaced finally, this has been a lens that has been talked about and desired for a long time.

We mentioned some time back that there were 5 or 6 version of the new 24-70, and one of them had IS. Canon decided against an IS version for reasons to do with weight, size and cost from what I’m told.

Sadly for the ones that want an IS version of this lens, I have little faith that such a lens will be coming any time soon. Patents can sometimes appear after a product has been announced, and that’s probably what has happened here.

Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L IS

Patent Publication No. 2012-123156

• 2012.6.28 Release Date
• 2010.12.8 filing date

Example 1

• Zoom ratio 2.46
• 68.99mm – f = 28.00 focal length
• Fno. 2.88
• 17.41 deg – 37.69 half angle of view.
• Image height 21.64mm
• 222.38mm – 192.25 full-length lens
• BF 39.98 – 53.68
• Effective diameter 74.47mm ball before
• Effective diameter aperture 31.23mm
• 19 sheets 12 group lens configuration
• Three three aspherical surface
• 2 UD glass sheet

Example 2

• Zoom ratio 2.86
• 68.70 – f = 24.00 focal length
• Fno. 2.88
• 17.48 deg – 42.03 half angle of view.
• Image height 21.64mm
• 224.86mm – 191.93 full-length lens
• BF 39.85 – 55.68mm
• Effective diameter 77.29mm ball before
• Effective diameter aperture 32.58mm
• Lens Construction 12 group 21 sheets
• Three three aspherical surface
• 2 UD glass sheet
• Five-group zoom positive and negative positive positive and negative
• (For Focusing group 2) Inner Focus
• (Part 1 of the fourth lens group, anti-vibration unit is L4a) image stabilization

Source: [EG]

cr

[Lee Jay]

It's good that the new one doesn't have IS.  That allows me to spend the money I would have spent on it elsewhere.

[Daniel Flather]

Canon is just playing you.

[japhoto]

Two possibilities.

1.) This was one of the lenses tested for the MkII of the 24-70L and it was just patented for the sake of being patented.

2.) Canon actually listens what people want and on top of that Tamron has put pressure on them with their stabilized lens, so they are bringing one out.

I'm willing to bet on the first option though...

[Etienne]

It's good that the new one doesn't have IS.  That allows me to spend the money I would have spent on it elsewhere.

At $2300 it should come with IS ...

... and a Butler.

[RayValdez360]

So they will make an overpriced V2 and then have plans for a IS version. Why didn't they just make the V2 have IS?

[Ricku]

So they will make an overpriced V2 and then have plans for a IS version. Why didn't they just make the V2 have IS?

It is quite simple really. Canon will first launch the overpriced 24-70L II, and then they will launch the 24-70L II IS at an ever higher price! (Let's call it "over overpriced").

The pricetag of the IS version will then make the non IS version look like a bargain!

This strategy might seem kinda strange, but do not worry - Canonites will bend over and take it deep. Both versions will sell like hotcakes, regardless of overpricing.  Just look at the 5D3 sales!

These are happy days for Canon.

[pwp]

So they will make an overpriced V2 and then have plans for a IS version. Why didn't they just make the V2 have IS?

It is quite simple really. Canon will first launch the overpriced 24-70L II, and then they will launch the 24-70L II IS at an ever higher price!
The pricetag of the IS version will then make the non IS version look like a bargain!

This strategy seems to have worked with both the 70-200 f/2.8 & f4. The IS versions makes the non-IS versions look like a bargain....and they probably are!

PW

[dstppy]

OR . . . it would be so unfeasibly expensive now that they really need a bulletproof mkII run to get all of the optics right before releasing a 'just with IS' upgrade.

What was the other option, charge $2300 for a mkII that ONLY had IS and could basically churn out 'as good' pictures?

My vote goes with that this was one of the 'test iterations' out there, and it just didn't have good enough IQ to go this route vs what they are releasing . . .

Or we could complain about price more.  I came to do that but everyone else beat me to it, so I guess I have to think instead.

[wickidwombat]

i hope they make it a non extending zoom like the 70-200 too

[picturesbyme]

Smart move from Canon and now there is a lens they can charge 2500 for and people will go for it.
Maybe they should have asked $2500 for the mk2 and 2900 for this, people would still defend it b/c it would became a status symbol like.... 

[robbymack]

I know others would like a stabilized version of this but I cannot see the use in this focal range for what I shoot. That is just my $0.02. I am sure others would so I'd be fine with two versions of this lens at two price points.

[Gcon]

So they will make an overpriced V2 and then have plans for a IS version. Why didn't they just make the V2 have IS?

It is quite simple really. Canon will first launch the overpriced 24-70L II, and then they will launch the 24-70L II IS at an ever higher price! (Let's call it "over overpriced").

The pricetag of the IS version will then make the non IS version look like a bargain!

This strategy might seem kinda strange, but do not worry - Canonites will bend over and take it deep. Both versions will sell like hotcakes, regardless of overpricing.  Just look at the 5D3 sales!

These are happy days for Canon.

The IS version wouldn't be called "24-70L II IS" as this implies that there is already an IS version out there. The first IS version would be "24-70mm f/2.8L IS USM" (no "II").

I am quite happy to not have IS. Just use a flash and/or high ISO or even a tripod. Problem solved. Good job Canon.

[dilbert]

If Canon replaced the 24-70/2.8 USM with a 24-70/2.8 IS USM, then I imagine a whole lot of people would have been severely annoyed with the price. Given Canon's current pricing we could expect this lens to be well over $2500 and possible close to $3000.

Would the Canon faithful accept a lens selling for around $1200 with a lens close to $3000? I think not.

But now that the 24-70/2.8 USM Mk II is on the market at $2299, a 24-70/2.8 IS USM for $2799 doesn't seem like such a big deal, does it?

[adhocphotographer]

Tamron 24-70 VC= 1000€
Canon 24-70 I = 1200€
Canon 24-70 II = 2300€

from what I gather (i do not own any of these lenses, much to the pitty), the Tamron is egual to, if not better than the Canon mkI in optical quality and is ~20% cheaper AND has VC. The Mk II is hailed to have supirior optics, but no IS and costs 2.3x the price...  An IS version of MkI or MkII would be closer to 3000€ (as dilbert suggested), 3x the price of the Tamron... Seems a little overpriced!

I honestly think Canon is not in the most competative position for its standard 24-70 zooms... they are pricing themselves out of the race... 

Competition is always good, any new lens from any maker is good for all of us, directly or indirectly!  I say, let canon bring an IS version out, let it be stupidly overpriced, and let them learn their lesson!